Guess who’s funding ObamaCare advocates?

posted at 1:39 pm on August 10, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

Greg Sargent notes that a familiar face will start showering cash on organizations trying to build support for ObamaCare. George Soros, who once pledged his entire fortune in an unsuccessful effort to unseat George Bush, has pledged another $5 million to overcome popular opposition to the government takeover of the health-care industry. Sargent rightly notes that this will become a flashpoint for both sides of the divide:

In another sign of the urgency gripping the pro-health care reform camp, billionaire George Soros has pledged to sink $5 million into the fight, the group getting the money confirmed.

Soros — whose operation carefully guards the privacy of such donations — made the pledge to Health Care For America Now, the leading coalition of pro-reform groups, unions and providers, HCAN chief Richard Kirsch confirmed in an email that was forwarded to me. …

The Soros pledge is noteworthy, because both sides will seize on it. The right will say it shows the real astroturfing is coming from the pro-reform side — billionaire bogeyman Soros is bankrolling this fight!

The left will cite the donation to demand that HCAN show real results. Some on the left, such as blogger Jane Hamsher, have been asking why heavily-bankrolled HCAN hasn’t been able to secure more commitments from Dem members of Congress to stand firm behind a public option.

However, that group may run afoul of Rahm Emanuel and the White House. Emanuel has demanded that HCAN and other advocacy groups focus their sights on Republicans and stop attacking vulnerable Democrats — which, in this case, would be those who have shown great reluctance to get on board with ObamaCare. If HCAN takes Emanuel’s advice, it’s hard to see what they’ll use the money to do, other than buy advertising that strictly focuses on the issue. That issue hasn’t played well thus far, and $5 million of advertising won’t make a dent in the opposition.

The drug industry has authorized its lobbyists to spend as much as $150 million on television commercials supporting President Obama’s health care overhaul, beginning over the August Congressional recess, people briefed on the plans said Saturday.

The unusually large scale of the industry’s commitment to the cause helps explain some of a contentious back-and-forth playing out in recent days between the odd-couple allies over a deal that the White House struck with the industry in June to secure its support. The terms of the deal were not fully disclosed. Both sides had announced that the drug industry would contribute $80 billion over 10 years to the cost of the health care overhaul without spelling out the details.

With House Democrats moving to extract more than that just as the drug makers finalized their advertising plans, the industry lobbyists pressed the Obama administration for public reassurances that it had agreed to cap the industry’s additional costs at $80 billion. The White House, meanwhile, has struggled to mollify its most pivotal health industry ally without alienating Congressional Democrats who want to demand far more of the drug makers. White House officials could not immediately be reached for comment.

To give this some perspective, it helps to recall that John McCain spent $126 million on advertising for the entire general election campaign in 2008. Why have the pharmaceuticals gone for ObamaCare in a big way? Obama promised not to use Medicare’s market advantage to drive down prices any more than the $80 billion already pledged by the industry. That’s basically price-fixing of a kind that the Federal Trade Commission would investigate if it involved a private-sector insurance giant.

Remind me again which side is Astroturfing and getting big, powerful firms funding their operation, and which one represents the actual sense of Americans on government-controlled health care.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Comments

What is going to happen in reality is that there will be “Obamacare” and people will have “supplimental” insurance to cover what Obamacare doesn’t cover. So we end up paying for two policies for what we used to get with one. I don’t see how that “reduces” medical costs.

If he plans on buying up every health insurance entity in this country, well then we have a problem.

sherry on August 10, 2009 at 2:18 PM

This is not how Soros plays the game. He’s not going to buy up anything. Having it handed to him on a platter is more like it.

To keep the fig leaf in place, once the private insurers start to tank, Soros and Progressive may ride to the rescue and be granted exclusive control by the Obama Administration to preserve that canard that government isn’t running insurance companies. At the same time, Soros may well be running the same.

And it follows that each of the things is, by the respective parties, called by two different and incompatible names – liberty and tyranny.
Abraham Lincoln

Speakup on August 10, 2009 at 2:02 PM

Excellent reference!

And Abe Lincoln made it clear in his House Divided speech that the Republican Party could not placate the bipartisan RINOs of his day. Lincoln demolished the “middle road” Republican premise of his day as he strove to maintain the Union prior to the Civil War. Lincoln won the debate, Douglas lost.

Who’d have thought a rail-splitting backwoods hick self taught lawyer could outdo the elitist of his day? It takes common sense to appreciate what makes all the difference.

The problem is that most of the populace is now so ignorant…how many of us take the time to read what you and other conservatives write and educate ourselves in order to know who and how to fight…this is what depresses me…a few million of us care… many millions more are oblivious and are just waiting for The One to tell them what is cool and how they are going to live their lives….

Plueeeeeesssssssssssseeeeeeee….#1 buyer of coffee in the world, U.S. Government. #1 buyer of meds in the world (after BarryCare), U.S. Government.

Pharma knows where the volume orders are, and they aren’t from your local Rx.

Limerick on August 10, 2009 at 2:20 PM

It’s about patents and investments. I don’t know (yet but I’ll try to gain more insight) Pharma is in bed with ObamaCare (what the deal with the devil has been that would align them with Obama), but I am nearly sure it’s directly due to deals with patents and/or investments/debt.

Pharma wants patents extended, or, rather, the life of patents extended, while the Left/Democrats have continued to protest such (and prevent that). If the life of patents can be extended, then, Pharma can reap a bigger payback for it’s very large investment in developing a specific drug. When patent life is shortened, they can’t reap as much for their investment so they charge much more during the life of the patent.

Also, investment in Pharma remains huge, it’s an area of keen investment for “Wall Street” that is largely Democrat, unfortunately (the firms and their employees, their strategies favoring also-Demo-aligned), so I’m sure there’s some hammer been swung upon many people’s futures.

This is not how Soros plays the game. He’s not going to buy up anything. Having it handed to him on a platter is more like it.

To keep the fig leaf in place, once the private insurers start to tank, Soros and Progressive may ride to the rescue and be granted exclusive control by the Obama Administration to preserve that canard that government isn’t running insurance companies. At the same time, Soros may well be running the same.

Convenient coincidence?

coldwarrior on August 10, 2009 at 2:22 PM

THAT’S EXACTLY RIGHT. Soros single-handedly nearly ruined the entire British economy. He seems to float above corruption accountability just because he gathers up a lot of money from his corruption of others. It’s not the money or wealth he operates that bothers me, it’s his quite intensely evil character associated with it.

My hope for 2011 and a GOP strategery is to investigate Soros and the other sketchy means 0bama used to get funding for 2008—if nothing else, to keep him from being able to so blatantly use them in 2012.

Is such advertising going to make a difference at this point. Is somebody rabidly against government takeover of healthcare really going to change their position because the drug makers are for it? Douobtful.

highhopes on August 10, 2009 at 1:55 PM

They are going for the lemmings and will advertise on MTV VHI BET ABC CBS NBC etc…

Ouch. Rush just played the clip of Obama in 2003 describing his desire for communist-style single-payer health care takeover; this extended clip has Obama describing a process of choking out the private competition until we reach a point that he characterized as:

My goodness I’m pleased to see how many people are finally getting hip to the unspeakable George Soros. For some reason his bankrolling of the Lefties has gone largely unnoticed, despite such little stumbles as a MoveOn apparatchik publicly stating “We own the Democratic party now” in 2004.

Ouch. Rush just played the clip of Obama in 2003 describing his desire for communist-style single-payer health care takeover; this extended clip has Obama describing a process of choking out the private competition until we reach a point that he characterized as:

It is unfortunate that most people out there are unfamiliar with George Soros and his history in manipulation of govt and markets. I do not know how you get people to read up on him – if it could be done, they would quickly see just how evil he actually is.

If it will damage the United States, Soros will support it. If this is true, then Obama may be owned by more than one master. The Daley, Ayers and Wright group of Chicago thugs are hayseeds on this financial level.

I suggest looking into class action lawsuits against the drug companies for facilitating extortion. Open the drug price negotiation process to transparent discovery, so that the federal officers who are exacting coercive fees can be prosecuted.

I would think that owning stock in the drug companies would be sufficient to have standing.

You know, there are a lot of Eastern European immigrants who kept their sanity when they emigrated to America, unlike Soros, who has observed first hand the effects of totalitarian rule, and whose contradictory thought processes I simply can’t fathom.

Aren’t there some immigrants who can bring their maturity and gravitas to bear on this problem, who would be willing to go on record in a professionally produced ad? Can’t we get some comments by people who have been there, who can tell the confused Obatomites where this road leads?

My point is that people who don’t normally get along may be voting together as Democrats in part because of the prospect of universal health care. Take it away, and some groups may not want to vote the same as others anymore.

Some pro-life Democrat voters may see “universal healthcare” as reducing the cost of having babies (not true, I know, I know–we are not talking math majors here), and thus maybe reducing the need for abortion. If universal healthcare doesn’t happen now, they are not going to be as willing to overlook how not pro-life the Democrats are come the next election.

I’m not defending Soros, but you are not clear about Nazis and ‘German Socialists’.

Soros was 15 when the National Socialist German Workers Party regime was defeated in 1945. New parties were set up for the first elections in 1949 in the new ‘German Federal Republic ( West Germany ). One of the two major parties since then has been the Social Democratic Party, which is a typical leftist welfare state party like Labour in Britain–and in no way ‘Nazi’

What is going to happen in reality is that there will be “Obamacare” and people will have “supplimental” insurance to cover what Obamacare doesn’t cover. So we end up paying for two policies for what we used to get with one. I don’t see how that “reduces” medical costs.

Well, that’s pretty much the way Medicare works now, with most Medicare recipients having supplemental policies. It’s not necessarily a problem. The problem is that Obama and the Democrats want to wipe out the private insurers altogether, so that if we get ObamaCare, it’s only a matter of time before supplemental insurance will cease to exist. Whatever the government won’t pay for you won’t be getting, unless you leave the US and go somewhere else. But you are quite correct in that ObamaCare does nothing to lower the cost of health care.

Seriously—no amount of money is going to get the sword of Damocles from over the Blue Dogs’ heads. If they vote for the bill, the Republicans will “git” them and moderates will abandon them. If they don’t vote for the bill, Soros money can fund an even harder-left candidate—–thus ensuring whatever Democrat emerges victorious in a Blue Dog race will get his or her lunch eaten by the Republicans. Still no win.

This is something. We hear big shot Democrats trashing ordinary people while they take money from big Pharma and Soros.

If Republicans concocted some scheme that required secret deals with multibillion dollar drug companies, Hollywood would make movies about it…and no doubt someone like Obama would be the hero standing up to the bad corporations and the corrupt government officials.

I am not sure that seeing lots and lots of commercials from supposedly evil drug companies is going to help Obama, after all they are supposed to be the bad guys. Well, they were before insurance companies took their place anyway.

And both while not Nazi…do have a strong national socialist tendency…small letters, no caps.

Fabians advocate a gradual takeover of a society to change it into a socialist society versus the more traditional hard revolutiionary style found with most socialist parties over the years.

Britain’s Labour Party following WWII is a perfect example. Probably set the UK back at least 100 years in the process, and they have yet to recover. Nationalized industries, state control over all manner of normal things…like health care..and taxes on everything to include television usage…and subsidies for everything else.

“1984” and “Brave New World” and “Clockwork Orange” were all written in response to this sort of Fabian socialist utopia gone mad. Might behoove us to read all of them once again…regain our focus.

Anyone read about his childhood? As a half-Jew I can affirm not only is he evil, but he represents the twisted heinous strain of Jewishness whose magnificent self-hatred/loathing projects itself onto real Jews — Israeli’s and observant Jews (you’re not a real Jew if you say you’re an atheist, sorry) — and does everything in its power to annihilate the latter. See – Hitler, Spielberg, Emanuel(s), Chomsky, Finkelstein, etc. etc. (it’s terrifying how long this list is)

Why have the pharmaceuticals gone for ObamaCare in a big way? Obama promised not to use Medicare’s market advantage to drive down prices any more than the $80 billion already pledged by the industry.

What kind of idiots are running our pharmaceutical companies? Even if Obama kept his promise (which he almost never does), they have no assurance that Congress or a future President won’t renege on the deal. As soon as a politician weighs his chances of being re-elected against his word and integrity, guess which one wins? They’re making a deal with the Devil that’s holding all the cards, and they think they can win?

What is going to happen in reality is that there will be “Obamacare” and people will have “supplimental” insurance to cover what Obamacare doesn’t cover. So we end up paying for two policies for what we used to get with one. I don’t see how that “reduces” medical costs.

crosspatch on August 10, 2009 at 2:22 PM

That is exactly what Medicare recipients have today. It works sort of. Medicare survives because they underpay hospitals and doctors. That of course causes a decrease in the number of doctors who will treat Medicare patients.

Basic rule of economics and graft: Look for the money trail. The financial nod to the pharmaceutical companies is obvious, but what’s in it for Soros? He doesn’t invest $5 million unless there is some financial incentive that will benefit him personally. Someone needs to follow the yellow brick road from Soros’ wallet to the White House and find out why he even gives a sh!t about American health care.

Of course the drug companies want a public plan. They know they’ll make out like bandits.

A public plan will completely destroy the drug companies because of the price controls on drugs which will inevitably come with time. Just look at how much cheaper drugs are in countries with nationalized health care, and it’s because of the price controls. The drug companies are hoping they can buy off Congress by agreeing to cuts now, but no way will the lying bastards in Congress keep their end of the bargain.

Some pro-life Democrat voters may see “universal healthcare” as reducing the cost of having babies (not true, I know, I know–we are not talking math majors here), and thus maybe reducing the need for abortion. If universal healthcare doesn’t happen now, they are not going to be as willing to overlook how not pro-life the Democrats are come the next election.

Sekhmet on August 10, 2009 at 3:06 PM

I have actually tried discussing the issue of abortion as sin (grave evil, profound evil) WITH a Catholic nun, a person who is with a Catholic health care order, who I know relatively well on some levels.

I was aghast — shocked — to find her reveal that she is a Democrat. She says she didn’t vote for Obama, but she’s a Democrat.

I ASKED her how in Heaven’s name she could justify even associating with the Democratic Party while also professing to ascribe to and support the positions maintained by the Vatican, particularly as to abortion and euthanasia (since she’s had a career in Catholic health care), and I didn’t receive any response.

I cannot understand the disconnect some people try to maintain between their support and advocacy FOR evil while they then maintain that they are Catholic, or Christian as to Protestants. If you’re associating with evil, you’re taking the evil on yourself. I mean by that, you become it when you embrace it, even if it’s by support indirectly for it.

Thanks for your remarks, I better understand now your earlier point. I read a lot of negating about Catholics, particularly religious orders, though I also recognize that it can be difficult in these times with so many Leftwingers claiming to be Catholic while doing their best to encourage evil (they reveal they are not Catholics by the issues they endorse and support — that’s even a context in Catholic theology, that one is excommunicated by the process of involving in evil without redemption for such, for instance, as with Pelosi, Sebelius, Kerry, Kennedy, Biden, Dodd, etc., they actually have already, long past, excommunicated themselves from the Church, while instead declaring they are Catholics in the present [they are not based upon their actions, regardless of how much they maintain some sort of ‘religiosity’]).

So it’s difficult on all fronts, both as a Catholic to observe so much denigration of the Church AND as a Christian viewing so many who allege to be Catholic doing their best to proliferate evil (and to lead others astray, also quite a terrible sin).

I’m not defending Soros, but you are not clear about Nazis and ‘German Socialists’.

Soros was 15 when the National Socialist German Workers Party regime was defeated in 1945. New parties were set up for the first elections in 1949 in the new ‘German Federal Republic ( West Germany ). One of the two major parties since then has been the Social Democratic Party, which is a typical leftist welfare state party like Labour in Britain–and in no way ‘Nazi’

Janos Hunyadi on August 10, 2009 at 3:07 PM

Soundbites are difficult in a few sentences. My point was that Soros was involved with (for personal gain, therefore, “for profit”) German Socialists, the Nazis.

German Socialists, the Nazis, who I meant earlier. I’m not of any confusion as to who the Nazis were, nor what Soros’ involvements were even at the age of 15: still self-promotional in affiliation with evil.

The man profited by cooperating with the Nazis. That’s what I meant. What his age was when he did so doesn’t seem to be the issue, particularly since Soros has never denounced his activities at that age or any other.

No, her argument was invalid. Soros made most of his money in currency speculation–by ‘gaming’ the capitalist system in order to profit from what he wanted to destroy.

He’s a Closet Communist, and did not ‘do business’ with the Nazi regime because he was 3 to 15 years old during its existence

False accusations only discredit the substantial case which still needs to be effectively made against him

Janos Hunyadi on August 10, 2009 at 3:12 PM

No, actually, MY “argument” was and is entirely valid.

Perhaps it is you who is avoiding calling the thing that is what it is.

Soros — so you say now at the age of 15 while I never made any comments about his age at the time or any other — corroborated, cooperated with the Nazis. The German Socialists. He did so for personal gain, “for profit” in other words, ascribed to actions that benefited himself for personal gain, in other words, the man received a greater satisfaction reward for cooperating with evil than he did with opposing it.

I never alleged that Soros “made most of his money” that way, I simply said he’d collaborated or cooperated with the Nazis. A brief generalization BUT AN ACCURATE STATEMENT.

I don’t have the faintest idea as to what MONETARY reward or gain Soros may have received from doing such — that wasn’t my earlier concern nor point nor is now — but as to his character. His actions seem consistent throughout his life as being that by a person with rotten character, who pursues personal reward from evil. He has evil — debased, degenerate, wretched — character, let me put it that way.

Anyone read about his childhood? As a half-Jew I can affirm not only is he evil, but he represents the twisted heinous strain of Jewishness whose magnificent self-hatred/loathing projects itself onto real Jews — Israeli’s and observant Jews (you’re not a real Jew if you say you’re an atheist, sorry) — and does everything in its power to annihilate the latter. See – Hitler, Spielberg, Emanuel(s), Chomsky, Finkelstein, etc. etc. (it’s terrifying how long this list is)

It’s like people who claim to be Christian but attend “churches” engaged in witchcraft, voodoo, Santeria, “humanism” and New Age whatevers. It’s not Christianity, their beliefs and activities are not Christian.

Leftwingers among both Jews and Catholics are neither in reality but they are Leftwingers first and foremost, misrepresenting their “faith” relationships as mostly just political demands.

If he plans on buying up every health insurance entity in this country, well then we have a problem.
sherry on August 10, 2009 at 2:18 PM

This is not how Soros plays the game. He’s not going to buy up anything. Having it handed to him on a platter is more like it.
coldwarrior on August 10, 2009 at 2:22 PM

Soros’ style is to work behind the scenes without having to leave his fingerprints on anything. His favorite tactics are:
creating havoc in elections processes,
funding the campaigns of left-wingers to take key state offices,
creating financial instability by undermining the markets, and
making investments that will help devalue the currencies of countries that he believes should be socialist.

Soros operates on the belief that freaked-out citizens will have no choice but to rely on their governments which will have to keep growing in power to meet the demands.

He comes from the same place that allows Rahm to say things like, “Never let a crisis go to waste.”

can anyone picture the mental twister that must be going on in a leftists head right now? They are on the same side as “Big Pharma”. Actually, the intelligent ones are probably thinking “useful idiots”…but the real wingnuts? wow that would be fun to watch.

Repeat in history…big businesses supported Hitler as well…thinking the government would make them rich, it was too late when the Nazis took power who then took over these same businesses.
Conservative Voice on August 10, 2009 at 1:48 PM

Fortunately, there are still a large block of voters who remember some crucial European history. Maybe enough not to repeat it?